(a) Answer #3 - Question (R. Yirmeyah): If the goats (of the
Tzibur) of Shavu'os were slaughtered at the same time and
their blood was received in different vessels, after
throwing the blood of one, why do we throw the blood of
the other?

1. Answer (R. Zeira): It atones for Tum'ah that
occurred in between the two Zerikos.
2. R. Yirmeyah only asked whether a Korban (i.e. the
second) can atone for a transgression after it was
slaughtered - implying, he was sure that it can
atone for a transgression after it was Hukdash!

(b) Rejection: Perhaps R. Yirmeyah was also unsure about
that;

1. He asked, if you will say that that it can atone for
a transgression after it was Hukdash, can it atone
for a transgression after it was slaughtered?

2) "KORBANOS" OFFERED "SHE'LO LISHMAN"

(a) (Rabah): If Reuven's Todah was slaughtered l'Shem Shimon
(who was Makdish a Todah for himself), it is Kosher (and
Reuven fulfilled his obligation - Shinuy Ba'alim only
disqualifies if it was on condition to do Zerikah for
someone else);
(b) (Rav Chisda): It is Pasul (he did not fulfill his
obligation, but the Korban is Kosher).
(c) Support (Rabah for himself - Beraisa - Aba Chavin):
"U'Vesar Zevach Todas Shelamav" - this teaches that if a
Todah was slaughtered l'Shem Shelamim, it is Kosher; if a
Shelamim was slaughtered l'Shem Todah, it is Pasul.

1. Question: What is the difference between the cases?
2. Answer: Todah is called a Shelamim (it is a type of
Shelamim), a (regular) Shelamim is not called a
Todah.
3. Inference: If a Shelamim was slaughtered l'Shem
Todah, it is Pasul - but a Todah slaughtered l'Shem
a different Todah is Kosher!
4. Suggestion: This means that if Reuven's Todah was
slaughtered l'Shem Shimon's Todah, it is Kosher.

(d) Rejection: No, it means that Reuven's Todah was
slaughtered l'Shem a different Todah of his (e.g. for a
different salvation).
(e) Question: If you will say that if Reuven's Todah was
slaughtered l'Shem Shimon's Todah it is Pasul, the
Beraisa should have taught this, all the more so we would
know that a Shelamim slaughtered l'Shem Todah is Pasul!
(f) Answer: It needed to teach about a Shelamim that was
slaughtered l'Shem Todah;

1. One might have thought, since Todah is called
Shelamim, also Shelamim is called Todah - the
Beraisa teaches, this is not so.

(g) (Rava): If Reuven's Chatas was slaughtered l'Shem Chatas
(Rashi - his own Chatas for a different transgression; R.
Tam - Shimon's Chatas), it is Kosher (and Reuven
fulfilled his obligation);

1. If it was slaughtered l'Shem Olah, it is Pasul.

(h) Question: What is the reason?
(i) Answer: "V'Shachat Osah l'Chatas" - as long as it was
slaughtered l'Shem Chatas, it is fully Kosher, but not if
it was slaughtered l'Shem Olah.
(j) (Rava): If Reuven's Chatas was slaughtered on behalf of
Shimon, and Shimon must bring a Chatas, it is (totally)
Pasul;

1. If Shimon is obligated to bring (Rashi - and already
was Makdish) an Olah, it is Kosher (but Reuven did
not fulfill his obligation).

(k) Question: What is the reason?
(l) Answer: "V'Chiper Alav" - not for someone else;

1. (Intent for) the other person only disqualifies the
Korban if he resembles Reuven, i.e. he needs the
same atonement. (Shimon does not need atonement from
a Chatas, his Olah will atone for him.)

(m) (Rava): If Reuven's *Chatas* (our text; some texts say
'Olah') was slaughtered on behalf of Shimon, and Shimon
(thinks that he) need not bring any Korban, it is
(totally) Pasul;

1. Surely, Shimon once was Mevatel an Ase (but since he
does not know this, he will not bring an Olah), so a
Chatas could atone for him (as Rava taught).

(n) (Rava): A Korban Chatas atones for Bitul Ase.

1. A Kal va'Chomer teaches this - it atones for
Chayavei Kerisus, all the more so, it atones for
Bitul Ase!

(o) Question: Since Chatas also atones for Bitul Ase, why did
Rava say that if a Chatas was slaughtered on behalf of
someone obligated to bring a Chatas, it is Pasul; on
behalf of someone obligated to bring an Olah (i.e. he was
Mevatel an Ase), it is Kosher?!

7b---------------------------------------7b

(p) Answer: Chatas gives a small atonement for Bitul Ase, not
a major atonement.
(q) (Rava): If an Olah was slaughtered Lo Lishmah, it is
forbidden to throw the blood Lo Lishmah.
(r) We can learn from reasoning or a verse.

1. A verse - "...V'Asisa Ka'asher Nadarta...Nedavah"
(if you did as you vowed, i.e. the Zevach was
slaughtered Lishmah, it is a Neder; if not, it is a
Nedavah - a Nedavah may not be offered Lo Lishmah)!
2. Reasoning - because it was (improperly) slaughtered
Lo Lishmah, should we do another Avodah Lo Lishmah?!

3) OTHER TEACHINGS OF RAVA

(a) (Rava): If heirs inherited an Olah and it was offered
b'Shinuy Kodesh, it is Pasul (it is Kosher, but the heirs
must bring another Korban); if it was offered b'Shinuy
Ba'alim, it is (fully) Kosher;
(b) (Rav Pinchus brei d'Rav Ami): Shinuy Ba'alim applies even
after the owner died.
(c) Rav Ashi: Do you argue with Rava, and say that the heirs
must bring another Korban?

1. Or, do you just mean that (if the heirs were Mevatel
an Ase,) if it was offered properly, they get
atonement; b'Shinuy Ba'alim, it does not atone for
them?

(d) Rav Pinchus: I argue with Rava.
(e) (Rava): An Olah is a gift (even though it is brought for
Bitul Ase, its essence is not a Korban of atonement):

1. If the owner did not repent - "Zevach Resha'im
To'evah"!
2. If he repented, he already got atonement!

i. (Beraisa): If one transgressed an Ase and
repented, Hash-m immediately pardons him!

3. We conclude that an Olah is merely a gift.

(f) Support (Beraisa - R. Shimon) Question: Why is a Chatas
brought?

1. Objection: Surely, a Chatas comes to atone!
2. Correction: Rather, (if someone obligated to bring a
Chatas and an Olah,) why is the Chatas brought
before the Olah?
3. Answer: It is proper that if someone sinned against
the king, first an advocate appeases the king, then
the sinner sends a gift.

4) A PESACH OFFERED "SHE'LO LISHMAH" IS NOT VALID

(a) (Mishnah): (Any Zevach slaughtered Lo Lishmah is Kosher)
except for Pesach or Chatas...
(b) Question: What is the source that Pesach (Lo Lishmah) is
Pasul?
(c) Answer: "Shamor...*V'Asisa* Pesach" - all its Asiyos
(actions) must be l'Shem Pesach.
(d) Question: This teaches Shinuy Kodesh; what is the source
for Shinuy Ba'alim?
(e) Answer: "Va'Amartem Zevach Pesach Hu" - it must be
Zavu'ach (slaughtered) l'Shem Pesach;

1. Since we do not need this to teach about Shinuy
Kodesh (since we know this from the previous verse),
we use it to teach about Shinuy Ba'alim.

(f) Question: This teaches that Shinuy Kodesh and Shinuy
Ba'alim are forbidden - what is the source that they
Posel a Pesach?
(g) Answer #1: "V'Zavachta Pesach".
(h) Question (Rav Safra): This verse teaches a different law!

i. Question: Korban Pesach cannot be Bakar
(cattle), only a lamb or goat!
ii. Answer: Rather, it teaches that Mosar Pesach
becomes a Korban that can be (any, i.e. male or
female) cattle or flock, i.e. Shelamim.

(j) Question: This teaches about a Shinuy in slaughter - what
is the source for Shinuy in the other Avodos?
(k) Answer #1: Since the Torah taught about slaughter, we say
that the same applies to the other Avodos.
(l) Objection: (Rav Ashi): We do not say this!
(m) Answer #2 (Rav Ashi): Rather, "Zos ha'Torah
la'Olah...(ul'Zevach ha'Shelamim)";

1. (Beraisa): "B'Yom Tzavoso...Korbeneihem" (the
following verse) - this comes to include Bechor,
Ma'aser and Pesach.
2. The Torah equates Pesach to Shelamim: just as Shinuy
Kodesh and Ba'alim are forbidden in Shelamim, also
in Pesach;
3. Just as Shinuy is forbidden l'Chatchilah in all
Avodos of Shelamim, it disqualifies a Pesach in all
Avodos.

(n) Question: If so, what do we learn from "Hu"?
(o) Answer (Beraisa): It says "Hu" regarding the slaughter of
Pesach to Posel it (if it was Lo Lishmah);

1. Regarding Asham, it only says "Hu" after the Eimurim
are burned,

i. (A Korban is not Pasul if the Eimurim are
burned Lo Lishmah -) even if they are not
burned at all, the Korban is Kosher!